Political correctness is narcissism when a tone of voice can be objectionable.
by Tom Thorne
The other day on the radio I heard an interview which caused me to reflect on political correctness and its place in our daily lives. A woman was on air talking about individual rights when she suddenly said to the radio host that she detected a tone in his voice that she found objectionable.
She forced the issue to the point where the radio host, mostly to retain any kind of decorum, apologized for his alleged negative tone of voice. The woman was quite strident and from her point of view she detected a pejorative tone.
My instinct was to confront her rudeness because her tone was certainly obnoxious and insulting to a very professional radio host. My first response to this woman’s rudeness was shock. Her confrontational tone was alright but the alleged tone of the radio host was not. It was one sided and in my view, did not deserve any apology.
And even when she got an apology she continued with her tone to hammer home her problem with the radio host never defining the problem she had with his tone. Eventually the on air host cut her interview short and called for a station break. She was right and he was wrong there was no ability to interact with ideas and certainly not discuss her views about tone of voice. Narcissism raised its self-centred head. Hopefully when off air he confronted her rudeness.
This kind of ardent political correctness seems to becoming more prevalent. It seems that some individuals must interface others and society only on their terms. There is no restraint or give and take. If a practitioner of this kind of lifestyle discovers something they consider to be objectionable they can unleash a torrent of rudeness which of course they consider to be alright because they are correcting a wrong from their perspective.
Well in my way of thinking this is rampant narcissism. Almost anything anyone can say can be deemed objectionable if tone is used as a measure. Where would such a social convention come from? Why does the individual trump normal social convention? Why are we allowing individuals to declare something objectionable and force apologies when they are not needed?
When the focus is only or primarily on me, then how I define the world is only in my terms. I am frankly loath to understand the social origins of such a notion. In my view it is a type of fascism. Everything is defined in the terms of the person or groups with a political correct ax to grind. It is my way is the only way.
Of course we all know life doesn’t work like this but these politically correct narcissists think that what they sense or understand is always right. This must be a simple self-focused way to live. Imagine saying that you are always right. My perceptions are always the right one. My views are the correct way to think.
That kind of view of social interaction when it becomes political is in my view a branch of fascism. It defies logic, facts and basic social conventions. It’s the kind of idea that gets concentration camps and political re-education camps built. It can turn ugly and become persecution very fast.
This type of thinking does not engage in dialogue or interchange ideas. It is by its nature anti-democratic. It is also anti-intellectual because it shuts out other ideas by putting up road blocks that are defined as too objectionable to discuss including someone’s tone in their speech.
Even in the case of the radio host he asked the woman to tell him what was objectionable in his tone asking her questions. She was unable to tell him what he had allegedly done wrong. However, she stayed on the attack saying that in her view his tone was by her personal standards deemed objectionable.
The origins of this type of thinking are old. They are the same as people who deny evolution or even a discussion of the topic in schools. The viewpoint they present is fixed. It is a literal interpretation of the Bible that says the Earth is 6000 years old. It is the Nazi view that Jews are responsible for all of Germany’s post World War 1 ills. It is the mentality that can devise the Final Solution. It is personal censorship.
It is a world of guilty where innocence has no equity or value. It is prejudgement and it can only come from advanced self absorbed narcism. To use their own type of language, these people are listening to discussion and ideas challenged.
© Copyright 2013, Tom Thorne, All Rights Reserved.